How did this woman, become a saint? Ridiculous.

Originally posted by badmedia
So what you are saying is that a real person of god needs to worry about being seen as good in the eyes of men, rather than trying to help people find
the correct way? Bit too much Paul for me there, sorry.

Well you got something right...

Being sorry.

You know whats really sad? She was doing all of that way before the cameras were there.

She did it whether the cameras and press was there or
not. She did it until she died.

Can you say the same thing? Or are you just going to sit there and act very unchristian like and point out the faults of others while boasting what
you know about the word of God?

You know whats really sad? She was doing all of that way before the cameras were there.

She did it whether the cameras and press was there or
not. She did until she died.

Can you say the same thing? Or are you going to sit there and act very unchristian and point out the faults of others while boasting what you know
about the word of God?

First I'm not a christian, and I think it is a Satanic religion built on sacrifice of the truth.

Have you read the thread? Because I've liked explained this same thing over and over. She may have had the best intentions, the best heart and so
forth, and may have been just used. But the end result is the same, just a marketing tool for religion and getting more converts. Traveled the
seas for them. Seems I remember Jesus "pointing out that fault" in some back in his day.

As for the last paragraph, am I now supposed to list and boast about any good things I've done, so that I may be seen as good in your eyes? If I
did such a thing, would you then not call me on pride or something? I'd rather let you think I was "sorry".

I don't mind if you point out my faults, please do. But I am curious as to how you get on to me for pointing out those faults, while at the same
time pointing out my faults - and calling me a hypocrite at the same time.

Nope. Not even the progression is right. And so sorry to contradict you in your threads and neither do I post to all of your threads. And where am I
"playing victim mentality" and "running in circles"? Is it where I said I despise your motives *which I didn't*?

Then before I state I battle religion, and what it preaches, yet you still go after all my religious threads, not just you though, quite a few
others.

While advancing your own and pretending it's a belief that is not a belief.

Which I wish I could have a good debate on religion, without a "oh no, it's religion!'. Religion should be discussed like any other
subject.

Have you done as much as she has for the poor, homeless, sick and aged?
Even a "Moral" person would have to agree she has done way more good than harm. Even while being used as a "Tool".

So this is how we decide right and wrong in your world? We have to build up things to be seen as good in your eyes, and then and only then are we
allowed to speak up about the obvious? As if I must go out and save a bunch of people and such before I am able to see such things?

Give me a break, that is what you call epic fail. Pure freaking nonsense. All you are doing is trying to push me down as a means of ignoring the
truth of the situation.

I help those I come in contact with that need help to the best of my ability. Do I dedicate my life to helping those with low material wealth? Not
really. But I do dedicate the majority of my time and life towards helping as many as I can find the real wealth that the father gives. And if I
had known her, I would have tried to help her find it as well, which she was obviously looking for.

What kind of houses do you think Jesus built? Houses for the homeless, or houses of wisdom and understanding?

8All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them.

9They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.

10Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold.

11For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.

She served worldy authorities, like it or not, and nothing you can say about me is going to change that.

She served worldy authorities, like it or not, and nothing you can say about me is going to change that.

That is your opinion of course. I'm not going to try to change what you THINK she did wrong. Why would I want to do that? What is truly
silly is somebody who hasn't walked in her shoes judging her.

Tell you the same thing I told Watcher, I have made it clear what my issue was, it had to do with the system of the church which keeps people from
finding the father, while it claims to be about the father. Her statement only goes to show that she did not know the father, and that the church
itself is not of the father. She served that system and it didn't bring her any closer to god than the atheists have.

It is the church, it's false authority and system that I attack, and that you would keep focusing on her is either you debating your own assumptions,
or you trying to push out the left hand which appears good in front of men, in order to ignore the right hand that works in darkness.

You can keep on rolling your eyes until they get dizzy, you can call it simply my opinion, and you can deflect the accusations and attacks from the
church to her all you want. But it is not going to change the truth of the matter.

I have not judged her at all, nor am I even capable of such. She was the one who said she didn't know the father and such.

I am sick and tired of people replacing a real relationship with the father with religion and scripture. You defend it because you have done the
same.

She is called a saint because she pushed the catholic church, not because of what she did for god. Gotta have them saints to parade around with the
left hand.

Rather than trying to help the poor deal with their situation, I would prefer to get at what makes them poor in the first place.

These so called 'saints' are merely catholic inventions. No human can deem any other human to be a saint, they just do not have the authority.
The pope and his cronies can decide all they like who they think should be called a saint, it doesn't mean anything.
Unfortunately for catholics, they think that the pope is somehow special - I don't know how to break this to you, but he is just a man, with an
inflated opinion of himself, and anyone who reveres him is also in danger of hell fire.

Mother Teresa isn't a saint, though they're working on it. She's a beata - a blessed one.

The Roman Catholic Church has a process by which a holy person can be named as a saint. This usually involves the person being unusually devout.
There need to be verified miracles associated with the person. Verification requires witnesses to the miracle. A horrifying martyrdom in some
tortured way helps, but is not required.

While you may not agree with what Mother Teresa said, she was toeing the party line. Nothing she said was outside the teachings of the Church.
Abortion is considered murder by the Church. Mother Teresa was not out of place for saying that. She was expressing her religious beliefs. Why
should she not be permitted to voice her opinion, just because it disagrees with yours?

Forgiveness, even of horrible crimes, is a basic tenet uttered by Jesus. Again, her advice to "forgive" Bhopal is entirely appropriate, in light of
her religion. A life dedicated to working with the poor, trying to ease suffering, living in poverty and embracing it - all considered fine by the
Church. The guy who decides who gets named a saint is the Pope. Guess what his views are on abortion.

I'm not at all convinced that Mother Teresa's detractors have any legitimate beef with her. I can't imagine Mother Teresa stealing money. I mean,
what did she spend it on, anyway? Certainly not clothes and makeup, no fancy cars.

The reason Mother Teresa used dull needles is because new ones cost money, and they didn't have a whole lot of money. The sme goes for sterilization
- very difficult, without proper equipment. You can't just soak the needles in some alcohol. You need heat and pressure - and that dulls the
needles. She made do with what she had.

Anyway, she got out there and tried to help lots of people that everyone else had written off as worthless. She stuck with it for over 40 years.
That's more than just about anyone else does for those people. I don't see Mother Teresa's detractors doing jack for these folks. All they seem
to want is to criticize this woman after she's dead and can't defend herself.

But basically, the rules for naming someone a Roman Catholic saint are made by the Roman Catholic Church - and Mother Teresa is a strong candidate for
being named. You may not ike these rules, but you don't get to vote.

BTW - during the investigation period, the Church assigns a priest to play the part of the prosecution, seeking to discover any reasons why someone
shouldn't be named a saint. This priest is called the "Devil's Advocate". He'll try to dig up any dirt he can in order to oppose the
canonization. So it's not a slam dunk. It's something like a trial, with the prosecution, the "defense", and the Pope acting as judge in the
matter.

When will your antithesis to the thesis run its course? They were both false, but stepping stones nonetheless......Ah well, been there, done that, i
used to be a hard-core atheist, in response to the the hard-core fundamentalism with which I was raised. Then, I didn't know, and it troubled me.
Then, everything merged into one thing, and I am at peace. I am certainly not picking on you, even if it seems that way. You seem like a quite
intelligent guy. I just happen to disagree. I also happen to see a pattern in your behavior and thinking that has existed in me before. It ran its
course. The hard-core softened. Now my core is fluid. WOW.

Also, it is ironic that you stated that the high and mighty in the Catholic Church have no right to declare somebody a saint. I understand what you
are saying, and there is validity in that, however....you also have taken the high and mighty position of labeling her a tool, or downright wrong.
You have the same perspective as the mentality you see in those you are judging. Funny how it works that way......

Do you believe that documentary filmmakers are impartial? Are research scientists impartial? Is Fox News impartial? Are you, yourself,
impartial?

I worked with someone who grew up in India and received aid from her Little Sisters of the Poor. He had nothing but good things to say of her.
Should I believe you over him? Should I believe him over you?

Perhaps, she made bad financial decisions, but I doubt they were with malice or aforethought.

BTW, I also think the jury is out on it as I am skeptical of the clips above. This was not someone driving fancy cars, living in a palace, or
dropping money at Gucci like some of Madonna's Kaballah friends. She lived in a small room in a pretty crappy looking facility in India. As
Woodward said: Follow the money. Where was her "bling", so to speak?

Returning back to my "consider" the source argument, but...consider the source. Documentaries aren't made without money. Documentaries are
usually solicited and paid for by someone, and that someone usually dictates the outcome of the tone and "story". You do know they have "scripts"
don't you? I met a man coming back from New York who made documentaries and, yes, they do slant towards the funder.

Aaaaaannnnnnddddddd... the ONLY time you get something even resembling the truth is during a debate where you actually hear both sides of an argument
with equal time allotted (and then only if the debaters are any good). The rest of the time it is slanted with a bone thrown the other way to either
appear to be fair or because a tiny bit of guilt suggests they throw it from a sense of fair play.

Was she a "saint"? The people she helped or hurt will be the judges of that. The rest of us never knew her so who are we to judge?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.